It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Evolution, It's only a theory

page: 51
65
<< 48  49  50    52  53  54 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 8 2009 @ 08:25 AM
link   




According to what you just provided me. This speaks of Evolution as a Fact OR a Theory.

Not a Fact AND a Theory. Or am I mistaken?

If so, then I'll be happy to discuss Evolution with you. Put it in the right context for me though. I'm a little slow.


Remember AND and OR are probably 2 of the most important words in science. (Boolean Logic)




posted on Mar, 8 2009 @ 08:47 AM
link   
To quote a man vastly smarter than both of us Andre:

“Whenever a theory appears to you as the only possible one, take this as a sign that you have neither understood the theory nor the problem which it was intended to solve” -Karl Popper



posted on Mar, 8 2009 @ 08:48 AM
link   
Wow 1000 replies.....nice



According to what you just provided me. This speaks of Evolution as a Fact OR a Theory.

Not a Fact AND a Theory. Or am I mistaken?


Yes you most definitely are mistaken. If you look at every single link it says theory and fact. Even the quote that i highlighted in bold said "evolution is both a fact and a theory" I don't understand where you could have gotten the 'or' from.

Evolution is a theory and a fact for the trillionth time.

[edit on 8-3-2009 by andre18]



posted on Mar, 8 2009 @ 08:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by andre18
Wow 1000 replies.....nice



According to what you just provided me. This speaks of Evolution as a Fact OR a Theory.

Not a Fact AND a Theory. Or am I mistaken?


Yes you most definitely are mistaken. If you look at every single link it says theory and fact. Even the quote that i highlighted in bold said "evolution is both a fact and a theory" I don't understand where you could have gotten the 'or' from.

Evolution is a theory and a fact for the trillionth time.

[edit on 8-3-2009 by andre18]


No it isn't. You can't have it BOTH ways. Is it a fact or a theory? The Theory of Evolution is the theory. Evolution is the fact. If you want to call Evolution a Theory, then it is either Fact OR Theory not fact AND theory. I say Evolution is the fact. The Theory of Evolution is the theory.

It's tricky word play, but I think it's important enough. Fact or Theory? Let's talk about Evolution. Sure. I'll talk about Evolution. Just one question though. Evolution the fact? or Evolution the theory? or Both?

No other fact in science has this double meaning. Look it up. Fact and Theory. The ONLY theory or fact that will come up is Evolution.

I want to be clear.

Grats on 1000 BTW


[edit on 8-3-2009 by B.A.C.]



posted on Mar, 8 2009 @ 09:02 AM
link   
reply to post by B.A.C.
 


BAC

Let's look at Gravity. Gravity is both a "Fact and a theory." The fact is that, if you drop something, it falls to the ground. The theory is the explanation of the mechanics behind why that object fell.

Evolution is the same thing. The fact is that animals change, and over time they will eventually become a different species. The theory is the WHY that occurs.



posted on Mar, 8 2009 @ 09:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by FSBlueApocalypse
reply to post by B.A.C.
 


BAC

Let's look at Gravity. Gravity is both a "Fact and a theory." The fact is that, if you drop something, it falls to the ground. The theory is the explanation of the mechanics behind why that object fell.

Evolution is the same thing. The fact is that animals change, and over time they will eventually become a different species. The theory is the WHY that occurs.


No that's not right. Go look up "Fact" and "Theory".

Gravity is the fact. (verifiable observation).
The Theory of Gravity is an explanation of Gravity.

A fact is not an explanation. A theory is an explanation. They are not the same thing.

The Theory of X. Fill X in and make that theory a fact. You can't.



[edit on 8-3-2009 by B.A.C.]



posted on Mar, 8 2009 @ 09:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by John Matrix
reply to post by andre18
 


I realize some people have a need to prove something and a lot of energy behind them to do it. But really.... can't you find something better to do with your time than trying to prove to us that your ancestors crawled out of a slime pit, had knuckles that dragged on the ground when they walked or that they swung by their tails from trees?


Why do you insult yourself and your family tree like that? You were created to one day assist in the ruling of the Universe, both spiritual and material realms. Such power and authority must be tempered by a peace loving, humble and incorruptable spirit. Perhaps it's time to evolve spiritually and leave the animal ways behind you.

[edit on 7/3/09 by John Matrix]



What a huge load of self important, dribble.
If you dislike this thread so much, why post here?

Assuming a god exists, what makes you think that earth is the center of his universe? This is the height of hubris!

Astronomers estimate there are about 100 thousand million stars in the Milky Way Galaxy alone. Outside that, there are millions upon millions of other galaxies throughout the universe.
Scientists have recently calculated that there are approx. 7 sextillion stars in the visible universe.
That's 70,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 stars and many of those stars are expected to have planets based on the number of extra solar planets that we've currently found around stars.
Now with all that space, do you honestly believe that man alone was meant to use it?

This is my favorite part of your quote

I realize some people have a need to prove something and a lot of energy behind them to do it. But really.... can't you find something better to do with your time

The simple fact that you posted this means you don't understand how hypocritical it is so apparently someone needs to point it out to you. Consider it pointed



posted on Mar, 8 2009 @ 09:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by FSBlueApocalypse
reply to post by B.A.C.
 


BAC


Dude, fowgeddabowtit.

There is no point. Trust me. If you like dancing the circular jig with disingenuity made flesh, carry on.

[edit on 8-3-2009 by melatonin]



posted on Mar, 8 2009 @ 09:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by John Matrix
 


John Matrix.....you are really, incredibily showing an ignorance about, not only the Earth, but about how centripetal forces work.

THIS is why I think the School System is failing.....



Keep in mind you only get out what you put in to the school system

Just a general observation


[edit on 8-3-2009 by jfj123]



posted on Mar, 8 2009 @ 09:25 AM
link   
Can we all agree evolution is a fact with the theory explaning the fact?



[edit on 8-3-2009 by andre18]



posted on Mar, 8 2009 @ 09:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by andre18
Can we all agree evolution is a fact with the theory explaning the fact?



No.

I believe in the Theory of Micro-evolution I believe there is abundant evidence and hard facts to categorically say that MiE is factual and define theory as; coherent group of general and established propositions used as principles of explanation for a class of phenomena

MiE is a fact
the Theory of MiE explains the fact of MiE.

I do NOT believe in the Theory of Macro-Evolution. I believe the evidence is extremely soft to warrant a definition of theory as; a proposed explanation whose status is still conjectural ergo its still a hypothesis

MaE is not fact
The Theory of MaE does not explain MaE



posted on Mar, 8 2009 @ 09:53 AM
link   




I've never heard of theories of microevolution and macroevolution. How exactly do they differ from the theory of evolution?

[edit on 8-3-2009 by iWork4NWO]



posted on Mar, 8 2009 @ 09:56 AM
link   
reply to post by iWork4NWO
 


It was explained in my 2 posts HERE




posted on Mar, 8 2009 @ 09:58 AM
link   
Matters which part of evolution you're talking about Andre, it's not all or nothing, much like life. Parts of it is fact, parts of it is theory. To call it wholesale fact is mis-stating the truth of the matter and little more than belief system posturing.


Sorry in advance for the tangent.
reply to post by andre18
 


You did after all choose a hotly contested topic after all. Didn't expect this result?



posted on Mar, 8 2009 @ 10:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by Fundie
reply to post by iWork4NWO
 


It was explained in my 2 posts HERE



"Firstly, Micro-evolution (MiE) and Macro-evolution (MaE) are separate and independent theories, yet evos assume they are one. "

You got it wrong from the very beginning. They're not seperate theories.



posted on Mar, 8 2009 @ 10:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by iWork4NWO

Originally posted by Fundie
reply to post by iWork4NWO
 


It was explained in my 2 posts HERE



"Firstly, Micro-evolution (MiE) and Macro-evolution (MaE) are separate and independent theories, yet evos assume they are one. "

You got it wrong from the very beginning. They're not seperate theories.


I'll wait for you to read both the posts and make an informed comment rather than taking you to task on the absurdity of what you just stated
... ill then edit



posted on Mar, 8 2009 @ 10:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by iWork4NWO

Originally posted by Fundie
reply to post by iWork4NWO
 


It was explained in my 2 posts HERE



"Firstly, Micro-evolution (MiE) and Macro-evolution (MaE) are separate and independent theories, yet evos assume they are one. "

You got it wrong from the very beginning. They're not seperate theories.


“He that answereth a matter before he heareth it, it is folly and shame unto him.”
~Proverbs 18:13~



posted on Mar, 8 2009 @ 10:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by iWork4NWO
I've never heard of theories of microevolution and macroevolution. How exactly do they differ from the theory of evolution?


Mirco-evolution is supposed to be evolution on a small scale, marco-evolution is supposed to be evolution on a big scale. Here's the thing, nobody distinguishes between mirco-evolution and marco-evolution except to say they don't believe in marco-evolution.

The reason you'll never hear a scientist bring this up is because it is understood that there is no such thing as mirco-evolution or marco-evolution - there's just evolution. The more drastic changes associated with marco-evoltion occure through the exact same mechanism but happen over the course of thousands if not millions or billions of years



posted on Mar, 8 2009 @ 10:19 AM
link   
[edit on 8-3-2009 by Watcher-In-The-Shadows]



posted on Mar, 8 2009 @ 10:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by andre18

Originally posted by iWork4NWO
I've never heard of theories of microevolution and macroevolution. How exactly do they differ from the theory of evolution?


Mirco-evolution is supposed to be evolution on a small scale, marco-evolution is supposed to be evolution on a big scale. Here's the thing, nobody distinguishes between mirco-evolution and marco-evolution except to say they don't believe in marco-evolution.

The reason you'll never hear a scientist bring this up is because it is understood that there is no such thing as mirco-evolution or marco-evolution - there's just evolution. The more drastic changes associated with marco-evoltion occure through the exact same mechanism but happen over the course of thousands if not millions or billions of years


How incredulously mistaken you are. Please read my posts.




new topics

top topics



 
65
<< 48  49  50    52  53  54 >>

log in

join