Author Topic: For my buddy uberman...  (Read 15848 times)

SF1900

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 48806
  • Team Hairy Chest Henda
Re: For my buddy uberman...
« Reply #75 on: December 07, 2012, 12:33:19 PM »
Take the Bible out of it for moment. That's not what I'm arguing.

What I am arguing is that evolution is false, and science is mixed with it to pass it off as fact and it is indeed, not fact. It's a religion. A religion of death. "survival of the fittest". Everyone else dies.

And yes, if we didn't evolve in some way, we were in fact, CREATED. In this case, it's one or the other.

Over 90% of the scientists in the National Academy of Science believe in evolution. It has the most evidence for it of basically any theory. That list could easily rival your list.
X

The True Adonis

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 50255
  • Fear is proof of a degenerate mind.
Re: For my buddy uberman...
« Reply #76 on: December 07, 2012, 12:33:29 PM »
Here's a list of scientist, past and present that also don't "Grasp" the concept of evolution...I'll speak more on this this weekend if time permits....

So geniuses, you can get your list of scientists and your theorys full of holes that is constantly changed to suit your agenda or I can have my list of scientists, and my King James Bible that never changes.  Majority of the world believes in a deity. Evolution is another of bunk religions passed off as science that will die off and be looked at oddly. Good day gents.  Please have a look at my merry band of dumbasses below. :-* ::)  

From the look of this list, it looks like most of science of founded by creationist including the man who came up with the scientific method. :-*


Scientists alive today* who accept the biblical account of creation
Note: Individuals on this list must possess a doctorate in a science-related field.

Dr Paul Ackerman, Psychologist
Dr E. Theo Agard, Medical Physics
Dr James Allan, Geneticist
Dr Steve Austin, Geologist
Dr S.E. Aw, Biochemist
Dr Thomas Barnes, Physicist
Dr Geoff Barnard, Immunologist
Dr Don Batten, Plant physiologist, tropical fruit expert
Dr John Baumgardner, Electrical Engineering, Space Physicist, Geophysicist, expert in supercomputer modeling of plate tectonics
Dr Jerry Bergman, Psychologist
Dr Kimberly Berrine, Microbiology & Immunology
Prof. Vladimir Betina, Microbiology, Biochemistry & Biology
Dr Raymond G. Bohlin, Biologist
Dr Andrew Bosanquet, Biology, Microbiology
Edward A. Boudreaux, Theoretical Chemistry
Dr David R. Boylan, Chemical Engineer
Prof. Linn E. Carothers, Associate Professor of Statistics
Dr Robert W. Carter, Zoology (Marine Biology and Genetics)
Dr David Catchpoole, Plant Physiologist (read his testimony)
Prof. Sung-Do Cha, Physics
Dr Eugene F. Chaffin, Professor of Physics
Dr Choong-Kuk Chang, Genetic Engineering
Prof. Jeun-Sik Chang, Aeronautical Engineering
Dr Donald Chittick, Physical Chemist
Prof. Chung-Il Cho, Biology Education
Dr John M. Cimbala, Mechanical Engineering
Dr Harold Coffin, Palaeontologist
Dr Bob Compton, DVM
Dr Ken Cumming, Biologist
Dr Jack W. Cuozzo, Dentist
Dr William M. Curtis III, Th.D., Th.M., M.S., Aeronautics & Nuclear Physics
Dr Malcolm Cutchins, Aerospace Engineering
Dr Lionel Dahmer, Analytical Chemist
Dr Raymond V. Damadian, M.D., Pioneer of magnetic resonance imaging
Dr Chris Darnbrough, Biochemist
Dr Nancy M. Darrall, Botany
Dr Bryan Dawson, Mathematics
Dr Douglas Dean, Biological Chemistry
Prof. Stephen W. Deckard, Assistant Professor of Education
Dr David A. DeWitt, Biology, Biochemistry, Neuroscience
Dr Don DeYoung, Astronomy, atmospheric physics, M.Div
Dr Geoff Downes, Creationist Plant Physiologist
Dr Ted Driggers, Operations research
Robert H. Eckel, Medical Research
Dr Andrι Eggen, Geneticist
Prof. Dennis L. Englin, Professor of Geophysics
Prof. Danny Faulkner, Astronomy
Prof. Carl B. Fliermans, Professor of Biology
Prof. Dwain L. Ford, Organic Chemistry
Prof. Robert H. Franks, Associate Professor of Biology
Dr Alan Galbraith, Watershed Science
Dr Paul Giem, Medical Research
Dr Maciej Giertych, Geneticist
Dr Duane Gish, Biochemist
Dr Werner Gitt, Information Scientist
Dr D.B. Gower, Biochemistry
Dr Dianne Grocott, Psychiatrist
Dr Stephen Grocott, Industrial Chemist
Dr Donald Hamann, Food Scientist
Dr Barry Harker, Philosopher
Dr Charles W. Harrison, Applied Physicist, Electromagnetics
Dr John Hartnett, Physicist and Cosmologist
Dr Mark Harwood, Satellite Communications
Dr Joe Havel, Botanist, Silviculturist, Ecophysiologist
Dr George Hawke, Environmental Scientist
Dr Margaret Helder, Science Editor, Botanist
Dr Harold R. Henry, Engineer
Dr Jonathan Henry, Astronomy
Dr Joseph Henson, Entomologist
Dr Robert A. Herrmann, Professor of Mathematics, US Naval Academy
Dr Andrew Hodge, Head of the Cardiothoracic Surgical Service
Dr Kelly Hollowell, Molecular and Cellular Pharmacologist
Dr Ed Holroyd, III, Atmospheric Science
Dr Bob Hosken, Biochemistry
Dr George F. Howe, Botany
Dr Neil Huber, Physical Anthropologist
Dr Russell Humphreys, Physicist
Dr James A. Huggins, Professor and Chair, Department of Biology
Evan Jamieson, Hydrometallurgy
George T. Javor, Biochemistry
Dr Pierre Jerlstrφm, Creationist Molecular Biologist
Dr Arthur Jones, Biology
Dr Jonathan W. Jones, Plastic Surgeon
Dr Raymond Jones, Agricultural Scientist
Dr Felix Konotey-Ahulu, Physician, leading expert on sickle-cell anemia
Prof. Leonid Korochkin, Molecular Biology
Dr Valery Karpounin, Mathematical Sciences, Logics, Formal Logics
Dr Dean Kenyon, Biologist
Prof. Gi-Tai Kim, Biology
Prof. Harriet Kim, Biochemistry
Prof. Jong-Bai Kim, Biochemistry
Prof. Jung-Han Kim, Biochemistry
Prof. Jung-Wook Kim, Environmental Science
Prof. Kyoung-Rai Kim, Analytical Chemistry
Prof. Kyoung-Tai Kim, Genetic Engineering
Prof. Young-Gil Kim, Materials Science
Prof. Young In Kim, Engineering
Dr John W. Klotz, Biologist
Dr Vladimir F. Kondalenko, Cytology/Cell Pathology
Dr Leonid Korochkin, M.D., Genetics, Molecular Biology, Neurobiology
Dr John K.G. Kramer, Biochemistry
Prof. Jin-Hyouk Kwon, Physics
Prof. Myung-Sang Kwon, Immunology
Dr John G. Leslie, biochemistry, molecular biology, medicine, biblical archaeology
Prof. Lane P. Lester, Biologist, Genetics
Dr Jason Lisle, Astrophysicist
Dr Alan Love, Chemist
Dr Ian Macreadie, molecular biologist and microbiologist:
Dr John Marcus, Molecular Biologist
Dr George Marshall, Eye Disease Researcher
Dr Ralph Matthews, Radiation Chemist
Dr John McEwan, Chemist
Prof. Andy McIntosh, Combustion theory, aerodynamics
Dr David Menton, Anatomist
Dr Angela Meyer, Creationist Plant Physiologist
Dr John Meyer, Physiologist
Dr Albert Mills, Reproductive Physiologist, Embryologist
Colin W. Mitchell, Geography
Dr John N. Moore, Science Educator
Dr John W. Moreland, Mechanical engineer and Dentist
Dr Henry M. Morris, Hydrologist
Dr John D. Morris, Geologist
Dr Len Morris, Physiologist
Dr Graeme Mortimer, Geologist
Stanley A. Mumma, Architectural Engineering
Prof. Hee-Choon No, Nuclear Engineering
Dr Eric Norman, Biomedical researcher
Dr David Oderberg, Philosopher
Prof. John Oller, Linguistics
Prof. Chris D. Osborne, Assistant Professor of Biology
Dr John Osgood, Medical Practitioner
Dr Charles Pallaghy, Botanist
Dr Gary E. Parker, Biologist, Cognate in Geology (Paleontology)
Dr David Pennington, Plastic Surgeon
Prof. Richard Porter
Dr Georgia Purdom, Molecular Genetics
Dr Albert E. Pye, invertebrate zoology, biotechnology, biological control (1945–2012)
Dr John Rankin, Cosmologist
Dr A.S. Reece, M.D.
Prof. J. Rendle-Short, Pediatrics
Dr Jung-Goo Roe, Biology
Dr David Rosevear, Chemist
Dr Ariel A. Roth, Biology
Dr John Sanford, Geneticist
Dr Jonathan D. Sarfati, Physical chemist / spectroscopist
Dr Joachim Scheven Palaeontologist:
Dr Ian Scott, Educator
Dr Saami Shaibani, Forensic physicist
Dr Young-Gi Shim, Chemistry
Prof. Hyun-Kil Shin, Food Science
Dr Mikhail Shulgin, Physics
Dr Emil Silvestru, Geologist/karstologist
Dr Roger Simpson, Engineer
Dr Harold Slusher, Geophysicist
Dr E. Norbert Smith, Zoologist
Dr Andrew Snelling, Geologist
Prof. Man-Suk Song, Computer Science
Dr Timothy G. Standish, Biology
Prof. James Stark, Assistant Professor of Science Education
Prof. Brian Stone, Engineer
Dr Esther Su, Biochemistry
Dr Charles Taylor, Linguistics
Dr Stephen Taylor, Electrical Engineering
Dr Ker C. Thomson, Geophysics
Dr Michael Todhunter, Forest Genetics
Dr Lyudmila Tonkonog, Chemistry/Biochemistry
Dr Royal Truman, Organic Chemist:
Dr Larry Vardiman, Atmospheric Science
Prof. Walter Veith, Zoologist
Dr Joachim Vetter, Biologist
Dr Tas Walker, Mechanical Engineer and Geologist
Dr Jeremy Walter, Mechanical Engineer
Dr Keith Wanser, Physicist
Dr Noel Weeks, Ancient Historian (also has B.Sc. in Zoology)
Dr A.J. Monty White, Chemistry/Gas Kinetics
Dr John Whitmore, Geologist/Paleontologist
Dr Carl Wieland, Medical doctor
Dr Lara Wieland, Medical doctor
Dr Clifford Wilson, Psycholinguist and archaeologist (1923–2012)
Dr Kurt Wise, Palaeontologist
Dr Bryant Wood, Creationist Archaeologist
Prof. Seoung-Hoon Yang, Physics
Dr Thomas (Tong Y.) Yi, Ph.D., Creationist Aerospace & Mechanical Engineer
Dr Ick-Dong Yoo, Genetics
Dr Sung-Hee Yoon, Biology
Dr Patrick Young, Chemist and Materials Scientist
Prof. Keun Bae Yu, Geography
Dr Henry Zuill, Biology
Discrimination against creation scientists
Contemporary suppression of the theistic worldview
Do creation scientists publish in secular journals?
Do creationists publish in notable refereed journals?
Peer pressure and truth
Revolutionary Atmospheric Invention by Victim of Anti-creationist Discrimination
The not-so-Nobel decision
The tyranny of ‘tolerance’
Scientists of the past believed in a Creator
Note: These scientists are sorted by birth year.

Early
Francis Bacon (1561–1626) Scientific method. However, see also
Culture Wars:

Part 1: Bacon vs Ham
Part 2: Ham vs Bacon
Galileo Galilei (1564–1642) (WOH) Physics, Astronomy (see also The Galileo ‘twist’ and The Galileo affair: history or heroic hagiography?
Johann Kepler (1571–1630) (WOH) Scientific astronomy
Athanasius Kircher (1601–1680) Inventor
John Wilkins (1614–1672)
Walter Charleton (1619–1707) President of the Royal College of Physicians
Blaise Pascal (biography page) and article from Creation magazine (1623–1662) Hydrostatics; Barometer
Sir William Petty (1623 –1687) Statistics; Scientific economics
Robert Boyle (1627–1691) (WOH) Chemistry; Gas dynamics
John Ray (1627–1705) Natural history
Isaac Barrow (1630–1677) Professor of Mathematics
Nicolas Steno (1631–1686) Stratigraphy
Thomas Burnet (1635–1715) Geology
Increase Mather (1639–1723) Astronomy
Nehemiah Grew (1641–1712) Medical Doctor, Botany
The Age of Newton
Isaac Newton (1642–1727) (WOH) Dynamics; Calculus; Gravitation law; Reflecting telescope; Spectrum of light (wrote more about the Bible than science, and emphatically affirmed a Creator. Some have accused him of Arianism, but it’s likely he held to a heterodox form of the Trinity—See Pfizenmaier, T.C., Was Isaac Newton an Arian? Journal of the History of Ideas68(1):57–80, 1997)
Gottfried Wilhelm Leibnitz (1646–1716) Mathematician
John Flamsteed (1646–1719) Greenwich Observatory Founder; Astronomy
William Derham (1657–1735) Ecology
Cotton Mather (1662–1727) Physician
John Harris (1666–1719) Mathematician
John Woodward (1665–1728) Paleontology
William Whiston (1667–1752) Physics, Geology
John Hutchinson (1674–1737) Paleontology
Johathan Edwards (1703–1758) Physics, Meteorology
Carolus Linneaus (1707–1778) Taxonomy; Biological classification system
Jean Deluc (1727–1817) Geology
Richard Kirwan (1733–1812) Mineralogy
William Herschel (1738–1822) Galactic astronomy; Uranus (probably believed in an old-earth)
James Parkinson (1755–1824) Physician (old-earth compromiser*)
John Dalton (1766–1844) Atomic theory; Gas law
John Kidd, M.D. (1775–1851) Chemical synthetics (old-earth compromiser*)
Just Before Darwin
The 19th Century Scriptural Geologists, by Dr Terry Mortenson
Timothy Dwight (1752–1817) Educator
William Kirby (1759–1850) Entomologist
Jedidiah Morse (1761–1826) Geographer
Benjamin Barton (1766–1815) Botanist; Zoologist
John Dalton (1766–1844) Father of the Modern Atomic Theory; Chemistry
Georges Cuvier (1769–1832) Comparative anatomy, paleontology (old-earth compromiser*)
Samuel Miller (1770–1840) Clergy
Charles Bell (1774–1842) Anatomist
John Kidd (1775–1851) Chemistry
Humphrey Davy (1778–1829) Thermokinetics; Safety lamp
Benjamin Silliman (1779–1864) Mineralogist (old-earth compromiser*)
Peter Mark Roget (1779–1869) Physician; Physiologist
Thomas Chalmers (1780–1847) Professor (old-earth compromiser*)
David Brewster (1781–1868) Optical mineralogy, Kaleidoscope (probably believed in an old-earth)
William Buckland (1784–1856) Geologist (old-earth compromiser*)
William Prout (1785–1850) Food chemistry (probably believed in an old-earth)
Adam Sedgwick (1785–1873) Geology (old-earth compromiser*)
Michael Faraday (1791–1867) (WOH) Electro magnetics; Field theory, Generator
Samuel F.B. Morse (1791–1872) Telegraph
John Herschel (1792–1871) Astronomy (old-earth compromiser*)
Edward Hitchcock (1793–1864) Geology (old-earth compromiser*)
William Whewell (1794–1866) Anemometer (old-earth compromiser*)
Joseph Henry (1797–1878) Electric motor; Galvanometer
Just After Darwin
Richard Owen (1804–1892) Zoology; Paleontology (old-earth compromiser*)
Matthew Maury (1806–1873) Oceanography, Hydrography (probably believed in an old-earth*)
Louis Agassiz (1807–1873) Glaciology, Ichthyology (old-earth compromiser, polygenist*)
Henry Rogers (1808–1866) Geology
James Glaisher (1809–1903) Meteorology
Philip H. Gosse (1810–1888) Ornithologist; Zoology
Sir Henry Rawlinson (1810–1895) Archaeologist
James Simpson (1811–1870) Gynecology, Anesthesiology
James Dana (1813–1895) Geology (old-earth compromiser*)
Sir Joseph Henry Gilbert (1817–1901) Agricultural Chemist
James Joule (1818–1889) Thermodynamics
Thomas Anderson (1819–1874) Chemist
Charles Piazzi Smyth (1819–1900) Astronomy
George Stokes (1819–1903) Fluid Mechanics
John William Dawson (1820–1899) Geology (probably believed in an old-earth*)
Rudolph Virchow (1821–1902) Pathology
Gregor Mendel (1822–1884) (WOH) Genetics
Louis Pasteur (1822–1895) (WOH) Bacteriology, Biochemistry; Sterilization; Immunization
Henri Fabre (1823–1915) Entomology of living insects
William Thompson, Lord Kelvin (1824–1907) Energetics; Absolute temperatures; Atlantic cable (believed in an older earth than the Bible indicates, but far younger than the evolutionists wanted*)
William Huggins (1824–1910) Astral spectrometry
Bernhard Riemann (1826–1866) Non-Euclidean geometries
Joseph Lister (1827–1912) Antiseptic surgery
Balfour Stewart (1828–1887) Ionospheric electricity
James Clerk Maxwell (1831–1879) (WOH) Electrodynamics; Statistical thermodynamics
P.G. Tait (1831–1901) Vector analysis
John Bell Pettigrew (1834–1908) Anatomist; Physiologist
John Strutt, Lord Rayleigh (1842–1919) Similitude; Model Analysis; Inert Gases
Sir William Abney (1843–1920) Astronomy
Alexander MacAlister (1844–1919) Anatomy
A.H. Sayce (1845–1933) Archaeologist
John Ambrose Fleming (1849–1945) Electronics; Electron tube; Thermionic valve
The Modern Period
Dr Clifford Burdick, Geologist (1919–2005)
George Washington Carver (1864–1943) Inventor
L. Merson Davies (1890–1960) Geology; Paleontology
Douglas Dewar (1875–1957) Ornithologist
Howard A. Kelly (1858–1943) Gynecology
Paul Lemoine (1878–1940) Geology
Dr Frank Marsh, Biology (1899–1992)
Dr John Mann, Agriculturist, biological control pioneer
Edward H. Maunder (1851–1928) Astronomy
William Mitchell Ramsay (1851–1939) Archaeologist
William Ramsay (1852–1916) Isotopic chemistry, Element transmutation
Charles Stine (1882–1954) Organic Chemist
Dr Arthur Rendle-Short (1885–1955) Surgeon
Sir Cecil P. G. Wakeley (1892–1979) Surgeon
Dr Larry Butler, Biochemist
Prof. Verna Wright, Rheumatologist (1928–1998)
Arthur E. Wilder-Smith (1915–1995) Three science doctorates; a creation science pioneer

Moron.

SF1900

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 48806
  • Team Hairy Chest Henda
Re: For my buddy uberman...
« Reply #77 on: December 07, 2012, 12:35:00 PM »
IT also depends how you use the word "theory" and "Fact"

Is Evolution a Theory or a Fact?

It is both. But that answer requires looking more deeply at the meanings of the words "theory" and "fact."

© PhotoDisc In everyday usage, "theory" often refers to a hunch or a speculation. When people say, "I have a theory about why that happened," they are often drawing a conclusion based on fragmentary or inconclusive evidence.

The formal scientific definition of theory is quite different from the everyday meaning of the word. It refers to a comprehensive explanation of some aspect of nature that is supported by a vast body of evidence.

Many scientific theories are so well-established that no new evidence is likely to alter them substantially. For example, no new evidence will demonstrate that the Earth does not orbit around the sun (heliocentric theory), or that living things are not made of cells (cell theory), that matter is not composed of atoms, or that the surface of the Earth is not divided into solid plates that have moved over geological timescales (the theory of plate tectonics). Like these other foundational scientific theories, the theory of evolution is supported by so many observations and confirming experiments that scientists are confident that the basic components of the theory will not be overturned by new evidence. However, like all scientific theories, the theory of evolution is subject to continuing refinement as new areas of science emerge or as new technologies enable observations and experiments that were not possible previously.

One of the most useful properties of scientific theories is that they can be used to make predictions about natural events or phenomena that have not yet been observed. For example, the theory of gravitation predicted the behavior of objects on the moon and other planets long before the activities of spacecraft and astronauts confirmed them. The evolutionary biologists who discovered Tiktaalik predicted that they would find fossils intermediate between fish and limbed terrestrial animals in sediments that were about 375 million years old. Their discovery confirmed the prediction made on the basis of evolutionary theory. In turn, confirmation of a prediction increases confidence in that theory.

In science, a "fact" typically refers to an observation, measurement, or other form of evidence that can be expected to occur the same way under similar circumstances. However, scientists also use the term "fact" to refer to a scientific explanation that has been tested and confirmed so many times that there is no longer a compelling reason to keep testing it or looking for additional examples. In that respect, the past and continuing occurrence of evolution is a scientific fact. Because the evidence supporting it is so strong, scientists no longer question whether biological evolution has occurred and is continuing to occur. Instead, they investigate the mechanisms of evolution, how rapidly evolution can take place, and related questions.
X

Raymondo

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 6850
  • I broke Excel
Re: For my buddy uberman...
« Reply #78 on: December 07, 2012, 12:36:05 PM »
Impressive list, I take it the rest of the world's scientists (a few million people) reject creationism altogether.

Wiggs

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 40808
  • Child of Y'srael
Re: For my buddy uberman...
« Reply #79 on: December 07, 2012, 12:37:14 PM »
Over 90% of the scientists in the National Academy of Science believe in evolution. It has the most evidence for it of basically any theory. That list could easily rival your list.

Only difference is the guys on my list the creationist, STARTED MODERN SCIENCE and evolution is based on modern science.
7

SF1900

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 48806
  • Team Hairy Chest Henda
Re: For my buddy uberman...
« Reply #80 on: December 07, 2012, 12:37:40 PM »
Impressive list, I take it the rest of the world's scientists (a few million people) reject creationism altogether.

This. As I stated over 90% of the people in the NAtional Academy of Science believe in evolution. Wiggs forgot to post that  ::) ::) ::)
X

Wiggs

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 40808
  • Child of Y'srael
Re: For my buddy uberman...
« Reply #81 on: December 07, 2012, 12:38:12 PM »
Impressive list, I take it the rest of the world's scientists (a few million people) reject creationism altogether.

Either that or they haven't gone on record.
7

SF1900

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 48806
  • Team Hairy Chest Henda
Re: For my buddy uberman...
« Reply #82 on: December 07, 2012, 12:38:55 PM »
Only difference is the guys on my list the creationist, STARTED MODERN SCIENCE and evolution is based on modern science.

That does not mean anything. Science is progress. What is now known may have not been known back then. You cant cling to something in the past, especially if new evidence has arisen, no matter what the people in the past have said.
X

SF1900

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 48806
  • Team Hairy Chest Henda
Re: For my buddy uberman...
« Reply #83 on: December 07, 2012, 12:39:44 PM »
Either that or they haven't gone on record.

Now youre reaching. Gone on record? Seriously?

I could easily say that the creationists havent gone on record of truly believing in evolution.

Horrible argument and logic.
X

Wiggs

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 40808
  • Child of Y'srael
Re: For my buddy uberman...
« Reply #84 on: December 07, 2012, 12:40:07 PM »
IT also depends how you use the word "theory" and "Fact"

Is Evolution a Theory or a Fact?

It is both. But that answer requires looking more deeply at the meanings of the words "theory" and "fact."

© PhotoDisc In everyday usage, "theory" often refers to a hunch or a speculation. When people say, "I have a theory about why that happened," they are often drawing a conclusion based on fragmentary or inconclusive evidence.

The formal scientific definition of theory is quite different from the everyday meaning of the word. It refers to a comprehensive explanation of some aspect of nature that is supported by a vast body of evidence.

Many scientific theories are so well-established that no new evidence is likely to alter them substantially. For example, no new evidence will demonstrate that the Earth does not orbit around the sun (heliocentric theory), or that living things are not made of cells (cell theory), that matter is not composed of atoms, or that the surface of the Earth is not divided into solid plates that have moved over geological timescales (the theory of plate tectonics). Like these other foundational scientific theories, the theory of evolution is supported by so many observations and confirming experiments that scientists are confident that the basic components of the theory will not be overturned by new evidence. However, like all scientific theories, the theory of evolution is subject to continuing refinement as new areas of science emerge or as new technologies enable observations and experiments that were not possible previously.

One of the most useful properties of scientific theories is that they can be used to make predictions about natural events or phenomena that have not yet been observed. For example, the theory of gravitation predicted the behavior of objects on the moon and other planets long before the activities of spacecraft and astronauts confirmed them. The evolutionary biologists who discovered Tiktaalik predicted that they would find fossils intermediate between fish and limbed terrestrial animals in sediments that were about 375 million years old. Their discovery confirmed the prediction made on the basis of evolutionary theory. In turn, confirmation of a prediction increases confidence in that theory.

In science, a "fact" typically refers to an observation, measurement, or other form of evidence that can be expected to occur the same way under similar circumstances. However, scientists also use the term "fact" to refer to a scientific explanation that has been tested and confirmed so many times that there is no longer a compelling reason to keep testing it or looking for additional examples. In that respect, the past and continuing occurrence of evolution is a scientific fact. Because the evidence supporting it is so strong, scientists no longer question whether biological evolution has occurred and is continuing to occur. Instead, they investigate the mechanisms of evolution, how rapidly evolution can take place, and related questions.
It's a theory.  If you have to write a 500 word reason to prove it's a fact, it's not a fact. Facts speak for themselves.
7

SF1900

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 48806
  • Team Hairy Chest Henda
Re: For my buddy uberman...
« Reply #85 on: December 07, 2012, 12:42:04 PM »
Its a theory that has one of the most supported amount of evidence.

End of story.
X

Wiggs

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 40808
  • Child of Y'srael
Re: For my buddy uberman...
« Reply #86 on: December 07, 2012, 12:46:48 PM »
That does not mean anything. Science is progress. What is now known may have not been known back then. You cant cling to something in the past, especially if new evidence has arisen, no matter what the people in the past have said.

My point is you'll believe their science but not their belief in faith. There is no evidence proving there is no creator. No one is clinging to anything. Whether you accept or not is your problem. You'll have to answer to the creator in your day of judgement, as will the rest you. So enjoy your life here on earth and indulge yourself in whatever you'd like. It's funny how a book written so long ago still stands the test of time.

Your biggest problem is you're calling evolution science and it isn't. Why don't you go look up the definition of science then when you comprehend what it means tell me where they have OBSERVED evolution as it is defined.
7

SF1900

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 48806
  • Team Hairy Chest Henda
Re: For my buddy uberman...
« Reply #87 on: December 07, 2012, 12:49:04 PM »
My point is you'll believe there science but not there belief in faith. There is no evidence proving there is no creator. No one is clinging to anything. Whether you accept or not is your problem. You'll have to answer to the creator in your day of judgement, as will the rest you. So enjoy your life here on earth and indulge yourself in whatever you'd like. It's funny how a book written so long ago still stands the test of time.

Your biggest problem is you're calling evolution science and it isn't. Why don't you go look up the definition of science then when you comprehend what it means tell me where they have OBSERVED evolution as it is defined.

No offense, Wiggs, but again, horrible logic.

The burden of proof is on the person making the claim. Thus, if someone says a God exists, they have to prove it. I dont have to provide evidence a God doesnt exist because the lack of evidence that a God exists is self-evident. Its the default position.

Person making the claim has to provide the evidence.

There is also no evidence that unicorns and monsters dont exist, but i guess we should believe in them as well, huh, Wiggs?  ::) ::)

Again, just because something stands the test of time doesnt mean its real. Gee, these are poor arguments. People also thought the world was flat for a really long time.
X

Wiggs

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 40808
  • Child of Y'srael
Re: For my buddy uberman...
« Reply #88 on: December 07, 2012, 12:57:41 PM »
No offense, Wiggs, but again, horrible logic.

The burden of proof is on the person making the claim. Thus, if someone says a God exists, they have to prove it. I dont have to provide evidence a God doesnt exist because the lack of evidence that a God exists is self-evident. Its the default position.

Person making the claim has to provide the evidence.

There is also no evidence that unicorns and monsters dont exist, but i guess we should believe in them as well, huh, Wiggs?  ::) ::)

My proof is in the Bible.  It tells you everything you need to know. Who, When, Where, Why, and how...There will a day of judgement friend.

Matthew 24:4-5 KJV And Jesus answered and said unto them, Take heed that no man deceive you. (5) For many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and shall deceive many.
7

MAXX

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 16942
  • MAGA
Re: For my buddy uberman...
« Reply #89 on: December 07, 2012, 01:07:27 PM »
thanks for proving stereotypes wiggs   :-\

Wiggs

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 40808
  • Child of Y'srael
Re: For my buddy uberman...
« Reply #90 on: December 07, 2012, 01:09:10 PM »
No offense, Wiggs, but again, horrible logic.

The burden of proof is on the person making the claim. Thus, if someone says a God exists, they have to prove it. I dont have to provide evidence a God doesnt exist because the lack of evidence that a God exists is self-evident. Its the default position.

Person making the claim has to provide the evidence.

There is also no evidence that unicorns and monsters dont exist, but i guess we should believe in them as well, huh, Wiggs?  ::) ::)

Again, just because something stands the test of time doesnt mean its real. Gee, these are poor arguments. People also thought the world was flat for a really long time.

You know and I know, I never said anything about unicorns and monsters.  You're taking statements I said in the past about GIANTS there are in the bible, in ancient texts and in MUSEUMS and trying to trivialize them.

I'm not trying to prove something is real. It's called FAITH for a reason. Like I said, evolution is full of holes and is not science. Go read the definition of science as I stated and tell me where you observe evolution as it's defined.

You'd think these geniuses that continue with this evolution would be smart enough to disprove a book over 1,500 years old, the best selling book of all time and annual sales of 25 million books. BTW you wanna use numbers then over 80% of the people on the planet believe in God.
7

dr.chimps

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 28635
  • Chimpus ergo sum
Re: For my buddy uberman...
« Reply #91 on: December 07, 2012, 01:10:16 PM »
My proof is in the Bible.  It tells you everything you need to know. Who, When, Where, Why, and how...There will a day of judgement friend.

Matthew 24:4-5 KJV And Jesus answered and said unto them, Take heed that no man deceive you. (5) For many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and shall deceive many.
Yes, because nothing says 'fact' like the Bible.   :-\

Wiggs

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 40808
  • Child of Y'srael
Re: For my buddy uberman...
« Reply #92 on: December 07, 2012, 01:13:21 PM »
Yes, because nothing says 'fact' like the Bible.   :-\

Then it should be quite easy to disprove then shouldn't it? 1,500 years and counting, best selling book of all time and annual sales of 25 million and yet these so called geniuses can't disprove anything. Don't give me that burden of prove bullshit. If it's so easy, show me?
7

daddy8ball

  • Getbig III
  • ***
  • Posts: 958
  • Violence is not the answer. It is the question.
Re: For my buddy uberman...
« Reply #93 on: December 07, 2012, 01:16:07 PM »
There are a lot of religious books. One shouldn't read just one. Read them all. See if they have any commonality. Also, remember that you're reading (in most cases) something that's been translated multiple times over thousands of years. Is it meant to be taken literally?

I think a lot of evolution is evident..one can readily see it. But that doesn't ultimately rule out a designer.
The answer is "yes".

Palpatine Q

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 24132
  • Disdain/repugnance....Version 3: glare variation B
Re: For my buddy uberman...
« Reply #94 on: December 07, 2012, 01:17:50 PM »
So which one is right Wiggmund,  the bible or the Mayans  ???

Wiggs

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 40808
  • Child of Y'srael
Re: For my buddy uberman...
« Reply #95 on: December 07, 2012, 01:21:36 PM »
So which one is right Wiggmund,  the bible or the Mayans  ???

The Bible. But if you are insinuating the Mayans said it would all be over, they didn't. They said it was the beginning of a new age.  ;)
7

B_B_C

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 2381
  • change is the lot of all
Re: For my buddy uberman...
« Reply #96 on: December 07, 2012, 01:27:32 PM »
Quote from: Wiggs link=topic=450641.date=1354914550
You'd think these geniuses that continue with this evolution would be smart enough to disprove a book over 1,500 years old, the best selling book of all time and annual sales of 25 million books. BTW you wanna use numbers then over 80% of the people on the planet believe in God.

Indeed the bible (by which I assume you mean the Christian versions) has a staggering large circulation but so have the Qur'an, Maos' Quotations, Lolita, The Ginger man, The Common Sense Book of Baby and Child Care and of course the Happy Hooker have sold millions as well
c

dr.chimps

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 28635
  • Chimpus ergo sum
Re: For my buddy uberman...
« Reply #97 on: December 07, 2012, 01:27:46 PM »
Then it should be quite easy to disprove then shouldn't it? 1,500 years and counting, best selling book of all time and annual sales of 25 million and yet these so called geniuses can't disprove anything. Don't give me that burden of prove bullshit. If it's so easy, show me?
Hmm. So, book sales are your benchmark!? Awesome. I'll take science over mytho-poetical nonsense, anyday. Science is open to new ideas and is self-correcting; religious faith requires nothing more than closing your mind. Oh brother.

Parker

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 53475
  • He Sees The Stormy Anger Of The World
Re: For my buddy uberman...
« Reply #98 on: December 07, 2012, 01:41:36 PM »

The True Adonis

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 50255
  • Fear is proof of a degenerate mind.
Re: For my buddy uberman...
« Reply #99 on: December 07, 2012, 01:46:58 PM »
Then it should be quite easy to disprove then shouldn't it? 1,500 years and counting, best selling book of all time and annual sales of 25 million and yet these so called geniuses can't disprove anything. Don't give me that burden of prove bullshit. If it's so easy, show me?
Kind of like Fox News being the most widely viewed News Network and all of the information they "report" on is true and accurate.

 ::)

Wiggs, you are being moron and are really wearing the labels that apply to your kind like some kind of badge of honor.  Its demented.