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.

 

Don't let them tell you that "The Theory of Evolution" is a fact.

page: 6
14
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 6 2009 @ 09:21 AM
link   
quote]Originally posted by B.A.C.

I don't care about any of that.


Originally posted by B.A.C.

No one cares about semantics? Maybe you don't, but I do.


i care when they are bieng perposfully used to misrepresent things

a simple slip of the tounge ill over look becasue we all make them, like in the abiogenesis thread your using the term organic matter instead of the correct term organic molecues, your not the only one, its going on, on both sides of the debate


The Theory of Evolution is not a fact.

It's the only point I've stated on this whole thread. I'm not arguing, you are.


i think pretty much everyone agrees(at least in the last 1 1/2-2 pages that ToE is not a fact, we are classing it as semantics showing this. we understand its not correct but it not a huge deal to anything and doesnt in any way alter the fact evolution happens which some people will read it to mean (not your intention im sure but it will happen especially on these boards)

its the conspiracy the directed secreative agreement we dont agree with and this point we are trying to address

p.s. youve raised more then 1 point not a fact, conpiracy, god is a fact, that it is semantics

so if the hard headed dogmatic evolutionists are agreeing with you but saying its pointless .. how hard headed and dogmatic are they?

are you willing to admit that by your own deffintions it proves God is not a fact but is a theory? (and no im not turning this into an anti god dealio, i just dislike when people subject everyone elses views to a set of strict parameters then suddenly stop when it come to thier own becasue the effects will be similar as you did when you stated god was a fact)


[edit on 6/3/09 by noobfun]




posted on Mar, 6 2009 @ 09:22 AM
link   
No good scientist will tell you that the theory of evolution is a fact. Evolution as a phenomenon is a fact. The theory tries to explain the observed phenomenon (and does it pretty damn well) but yes, it's wrong to say that the theory is a fact.

[edit on 6-3-2009 by iWork4NWO]



posted on Mar, 6 2009 @ 09:26 AM
link   

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


I think you should have made it clear that although you state the theory is not a fact, you are not insinuating that evolution doesn't exist.

But you are right because a fact is effectively a specific occurrence and a theory is an explanation of a phenomena.

You stated in you op that evolution, the phenomena, is a fact. You for some reason feel that to believe the theory of evolution, however, you must relinquish your faith. Why? The theory puts no stakes in the non-existence of God so why should you feel that belief in the theory is mutually exclusive to faith in God?
Keeping in mind that faith is defined by belief without evidence, yet there is plenty of evidence for the theory, believing in it would not be the same as having faith in it.


I think it does go against the existence of God. Read Genesis. The two are not compatible in my belief and many, many other Creationists.

I also think that's why Evolutionists say "The Theory of Evolution is a Fact", to go against what they consider our silly belief in God instead of admitting that The Theory of Evolution is not a fact.

Say the truth. Not "The Theory of Evolution is a fact".



posted on Mar, 6 2009 @ 09:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by B.A.C.

I think it does go against the existence of God. Read Genesis. The two are not compatible in my belief and many, many other Creationists.

I also think that's why Evolutionists say "The Theory of Evolution is a Fact", to go against what they consider our silly belief in God instead of admitting that The Theory of Evolution is not a fact.

Say the truth. Not "The Theory of Evolution is a fact".



but really wheres the differance?

evolution is fact
the theory of evolution is fact

it nothing but semantics, evolution is still an observed fact and ToE explain those fact accuratley

its no different then us starting a whole thread becasue someone said jesus christ instead of christ jesus and put the title the wrong way around

or becasue someone said 'evolution is only a theory' ... not the factually correct 'the theory of evolution is a theory'

we know what was meant

and if you are so big on saying the truth and the emantics of language will you accept the challeneg set earlier based on what you said earlier and the deffintion you supplied to say honestly that God is a theory not a fact?

or are you brainwashed and part of a conspiracy, and dogmatic and har headed a you have accuse others of?

do unto others .... etc

p.s.

and asking people if the theory of evolution is fact and them saying yes is no more evidence of a conspiracy, then asking people if the sky is blue and them saying yes is evidence of a conspiracy to destory the truth and accuracy of science becasue we all know the sky really isnt blue its just light refracting through it


[edit on 6/3/09 by noobfun]



posted on Mar, 6 2009 @ 09:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by B.A.C.
Say the truth. Not "The Theory of Evolution is a fact".


Perhaps to resolve this issue you might show people saying 'the theory of evolution is fact'?

Earlier you said something like that 90% of scientists probably do it, and this is peppered with 'evolutionists' do it - suggesting it is a widespread problem.

Show this to be the case. At this point it's just an assertion.

We know that evolution can be considered both fact and theory. Thus, referring to it either way can be correct, depends on the sense of use - language can be a blunt weapon sometimes. Some might even say that the theory is so well-established to be almost considered fact - but it's still clear in such a case that there is some distinction.

So, away you go...

I'll give you a start. Three examples...


Scientists most often use the word "fact" to describe an observation. But scientists can also use fact to mean something that has been tested or observed so many times that there is no longer a compelling reason to keep testing or looking for examples. The occurrence of evolution in this sense is fact. Scientists no longer question whether descent with modification occurred because the evidence is so strong.

National Academy of Sciences

So is descent with modification a fact? I would say it is - as with humans and apes having common ancestor. And the mechanism is theory.


'Today, nearly all biologists acknowledge that evolution is a fact. The term theory is no longer appropriate except when referring to the various models that attempt to explain how life evolves... it is important to understand that the current questions about how life evolves in no way implies any disagreement over the fact of evolution.

Campbell & Reece. Biology. 6th edition

So evolution is fact, models and mechanisms theory.


There is no sharp line between speculation, hypothesis, theory, principle, and fact, but only a difference along a sliding scale, in the degree of probability of the idea. When we say a thing is a fact, then, we only mean that its probability is an extremely high one: so high that we are not bothered by doubt about it and are ready to act accordingly. Now in this use of the term fact, the only proper one, evolution is a fact.


So here the author is clear in pointing out what he views as the dimensional character of the veracity of real-world claims. A fact is just a claim with a very high probability. Agree or non? In this sense is evolution a fact?

carry on...

[edit on 6-3-2009 by melatonin]



posted on Mar, 6 2009 @ 09:58 AM
link   


God is a theory not a fact?


A theory must accurately describe a large class of observations on the basis of a model that contains only a few arbitrary elements, and it must make definite predictions about the results of future observations.

Saying "God did it" is certainly not a theory and far from a fact. It's simply an uneducated opinion, no less, no more.

[edit on 6-3-2009 by iWork4NWO]



posted on Mar, 6 2009 @ 09:59 AM
link   
reply to post by iWork4NWO
 


i was using his loose deffintion which is more akin to a scientific hypothesis



Originally posted by B.A.C.
A "Theory" is a plausible way of explaining verifiable observations (facts). en.wikipedia.org... That was simple wasn't it?


but he stated god is a fact when god only qualifies for the loose deffinition of theory supplied

a plausable(but in this case not a probable) way of explaining observations



[edit on 6/3/09 by noobfun]



posted on Mar, 6 2009 @ 10:04 AM
link   
reply to post by melatonin
 


Proof of the conspiracy? It took over 4 pages of this thread for ONE Evolutionist to agree and say "The Theory of Evolution is not a fact, it explains the facts of Evolution".

Why is that? Why such a hard time with that one?

I'll tell you why.

Because if I believe in the LIE that "The Theory of Evolution is a fact" you've got me beat. I can't argue something I agree with. This is what science taught you, this is the conspiracy.

Whether you believe in Creationism, ID, Evolution, you name it, this is still a dangerous idea.

Theories can be disproven, facts can't. If Theories couldn't be disproven science would collapse upon itself. What about all the ones that have? What if they too were considered fact and unchangeable? We'd still be thinking we could fall off the side of the Earth!!!



[edit on 6-3-2009 by B.A.C.]



posted on Mar, 6 2009 @ 10:13 AM
link   

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


Proof of the conspiracy? It took over 4 pages of this thread for ONE Evolutionist to agree and say The Theory of Evolution is not a fact, It explains the facts of Evolution.

Why is that? Why such a hard time with that one?


I saw this thread yesterday and my first instinct was 'no poop sherlock. Evolution is fact and theory, tell me something I don't know'.

Show in those 4 pages an 'evolutionist' saying that 'theory of evolution is fact'.

You are still basing this on assertions.


I'll tell you why.

Because if I believe in the LIE that "The Theory of Evolution is a fact" you've got me beat. I can't argue something I agree with. This is what science taught you, this is the conspiracy.


Nope, the first thing is to actually support your claim of this widespread lie, spread by 90% of scientists and 'evolutionists'.

At this point it just appears to be coming from your keyboard.

ABE:


Whether you believe in Creationism, ID, Evolution, you name it, this is still a dangerous idea.

Theories can be disproven, facts can't. If Theories couldn't be disproven science would collapse upon itself. What about all the ones that have? What if they too were considered fact and unchangeable? We'd still be thinking we could fall off the side of the Earth!!!


So facts are 100% claims of certainty? lol

Not likely. Perhaps 99.5%.

The above is just recycling stuff you've already stated. It's not what I was asking.

[edit on 6-3-2009 by melatonin]



posted on Mar, 6 2009 @ 10:18 AM
link   
As I pointed out in your other thread, no one who is educated in science and studies evolution is likely to say that evolution is a fact. They will state that there are facts within the theory of evolution. They will also state that there are unproven parts of the theory of evolution. And then they will get back to trying to prove and disprove. A scientist objectively tries to prove or disprove something. At the end of the day, they do not care what they prove to be fact and what they prove to be false.

If someone says that the entire theory of evolution is a complete fact, I see 3 possible reasons why.
1. They have an agenda which requires passing disinfo.
2. They can read, but do not understand what all the words mean when used together.
3. They are just following the herd and do not have a clue.

A scientist will not lose sleep once they disprove a part of the theory. They will move on to the next detail. That's when they will lose sleep. Trying to prove or disprove.

Proving evolution wrong really does nothing towards proving Genisis true.



posted on Mar, 6 2009 @ 10:23 AM
link   
Right now epigenetics is quite hot among microbiologists. If you manage to tear down Weissman's barrier Nobel prize, glory, fame, coke and adoration of super hot lady scientists awaits!

Yes, they're actually trying to disprove a fundamental (one might say) part of the modern theory of evolution.

[edit on 6-3-2009 by iWork4NWO]



posted on Mar, 6 2009 @ 10:25 AM
link   
reply to post by melatonin
 


I don't need outside sources.

Here they are anyway:

All of these claim Evolution is both a fact and a theory. WRONG.

Evolution is a fact. There is a theory explaining that fact. Evolution is not a theory. It is a fact.

www.talkorigins.org...

bioinfo.med.utoronto.ca...

www.actionbioscience.org...

www.stephenjaygould.org...

www.abarnett.demon.co.uk...

atheism.about.com...

I can post all you want if you're not satisfied.

[edit on 6-3-2009 by B.A.C.]



posted on Mar, 6 2009 @ 10:30 AM
link   

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


I don't need outside sources.

Here they are anyway:

All of these claim Evolution is both a fact and a theory. WRONG.


No, evolution is both fact and theory. You even stated this yourself:


Is Evolution a fact? Yes

Is Gravity a fact? Yes

Is The Theory of Gravity a fact? Of course not it's a theory that explains the fact of gravity.

Is the Theory of Evolution a fact? Of course not it's a theory that explains the fact of Evolution.


So evolution is a fact. There is also the theory.

Ergo, evolution is both fact and theory.



posted on Mar, 6 2009 @ 10:36 AM
link   
Actually, the theory of evolution is both laws and hypotheses... If there is only a single action, it can be either a law or hypothesis. If there is more than one action, it is a theory. That is all that a theory is in simple terms. A collection of actions that explains something. A theory is not one thing. It is a group of things. These things are facts and unproven ideas.



posted on Mar, 6 2009 @ 10:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by melatonin

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


I don't need outside sources.

Here they are anyway:

All of these claim Evolution is both a fact and a theory. WRONG.


No, evolution is both fact and theory. You even stated this yourself:


Is Evolution a fact? Yes

Is Gravity a fact? Yes

Is The Theory of Gravity a fact? Of course not it's a theory that explains the fact of gravity.

Is the Theory of Evolution a fact? Of course not it's a theory that explains the fact of Evolution.


So evolution is a fact. There is also the theory.

Ergo, evolution is both fact and theory.




Evolution is what the theory is about. Evolution isn't the theory. Wake up.

Is Gravity the Theory of Gravity? No, Gravity is a fact the Theory of Gravity explains.

Wake up. To say a fact is a theory and a theory is a fact interchangeably goes against their very Scientific Definitions!

Theory = explains a verifiable observation.
Fact = verifiable observation.

1. Does Evolution explain anything? NO.

2. Does the Theory of Evolution explain anything? YES it explains Evolution.

What do Theories do? Explain things. Now look at numbers 1 & 2. Is Evolution a theory?

I can't explain it any simpler.



posted on Mar, 6 2009 @ 10:42 AM
link   
The last attempt of creationists to disprove evolution is deny deny deny.

Like the husband caught in bed by his wife, completely naked with another woman. Despite the obvious, he will deny deny deny.

And will use any point possible to get out of the situation.

Scientists only call it a theory because there are exceptions to everything. The typical example used it, all crows are black. But there is the possibility there is a white crow somewhere in Madagascar that no one has ever seen. So it is theory that all crows are black, because we cannot absolutely certain that they are.

But, for most people, and most scientists, it is pretty safe to say that all crows, that we see, are black.


[edit on 6-3-2009 by nixie_nox]



posted on Mar, 6 2009 @ 10:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by nixie_nox
The last attempt of creationists to disprove evolution is deny deny deny.

Like the husband caught in bed by his wife, completely naked with another woman. Despite the obvious, he will deny deny deny.

And will use any point possible to get out of the situation.



That's actually Kind of funny. What am I denying if not ignorance?

[edit on 6-3-2009 by B.A.C.]



posted on Mar, 6 2009 @ 10:48 AM
link   



Brainwashed? By? Every book made on the subject? By all the teachers and scientists? I suppose i brainwashed myself to believe in this stuff. And since most people believe in this, then they are brainwashed too. My, my, my..You need help my friend. Or no, forgive me.. WE need help. You're the only normal, smart person out there.

...

THAT IS THE CONSPIRACY. People living in BACKWARDS LAND. The way they think is staggeringly ignorant. Looking forward to your next contribution to this site.. im sure it'll be fantastic.

Let this be the end of this thread


Critical thinking, friend. Learn to apply it in EVERY aspect of your life, and you won't be such fanatic about atheism/evolution/etc. I'm sorry I question experts and scientists, but that's how I was raised. TO QUESTION things. Anyone can be regarded as a scientist or an expert, it's simply a social role they choose or have thrust upon them. There is no scientific method for determining what is a scientist. (although it seems to be a measurement of what other scientists believe is "most right")There have been many dubious ones in the past, and quite a few in the present. And sure B.A.C.'s argument may be simple semantics but it rings true to me. All in all the technology we use to date the universe is extremely new. And since we've yet to actually OBSERVE how a molecule (of any type) behaves over 5000 years or so, any form of aging the universe and origin of life theories are just guesswork. There are about 60 or so "credible" theories of how the universe was formed and how life came to be. Why do you regard this small argument against evolution as an attack on science and preaching old testament canon? We don't have perfect knowledge of anything yet so I'm happy to leave our origins as a question. Why can't you? What is that dark oppressive voice in you that must stifle dissent? If we were living in ancient times, know and understand that with rhetoric like yours, you would not be the open minded philosopher type, you would in fact be the high priest calling for the burning of the witches, human sacrifice etc.



posted on Mar, 6 2009 @ 10:49 AM
link   
Ok so the debate should end like this.
We don't know exactly why or how we are here, we just think different ways as individuals that might be possible
Because really, this debate, has beat the dead horse until it turned into dust.
It is PERSONAL belief.
Let it be.

[edit on 6-3-2009 by CaptainCaveMan]



posted on Mar, 6 2009 @ 10:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by CaptainCaveMan
Ok so the debate should end like this.
We don't know exactly why or how we are here, we just think different ways as individuals that might be possible
Because really, this debate, has beat the dead horse until it turned into dust.
It is PERSONAL belief.
Let it be.

[edit on 6-3-2009 by CaptainCaveMan]


This thread isn't about why or how we are here. Read my OP.

It's about people saying "The Theory of evolution is a fact".



new topics

top topics



 
14
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join